EPISTEMIC INJUSTICE: TWO PERSPECTIVES ON SCIENCE COMMUNICATION
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5840/eps202562221Keywords:
science communication, epistemic injustice, communication models, citizen science, historical epistemologyAbstract
In the article I consider models of science-society communication in the context of epistemic injustice and communication within sciences. In the first part, I focus on two approaches: (1) historical epistemology and (2) the concept of citizen science. First presupposes the fundamental isolation of scientific communication on itself, therefore the process of dialogue with society is built on the principle of recruiting scientific personnel and screening out those who are not ready to work in the "city of scientists". The second approach, on the contrary, involves the use of non-scientist labor for scientific research and practice without their inclusion in institutional scientific structures. Then I address the specifics of humanitarian knowledge and its role in solving communication problems in both science-society communication and scientific communication. In the conclusion, using the example of progressive attitudes towards philosophical knowledge and justifications for the possibility of progress in philosophy, I show that without resolution and/or explanation of intra- and interdisciplinary disagreements, communication models of science and society, no matter how complex they may be, are doomed to failure.
References
Антоновский А.Ю. «Дайте денег и не мешайте», или О том, как наука относится к публике // Вестник Томского государственного университета. Философия. Социология. Политология. 2023. № 74. С. 249–256. DOI: 10.17223/1998863X/74/22.
Соколова Т.Д., Тухватулина Л.А. Методологический редукционизм и идея прогресса в социально-гуманитарных науках: интерналистская перспектива // Вопросы философии. 2022. № 11. С. 76–86. DOI: 10.21146/0042-8744-2022-11-76-86.
Тухватулина Л.А. Наука как объект веры и недоверия: феномен дениализма // Эпистемология и философия науки. 2023. Т. 60. № 1. С. 6–20. DOI: 10.5840/eps20236011.
Шиповалова Л.В. Распределенное научное познание – на пути к разнообразию // Эпистемология и философия науки. 2023. Т. 60. № 4. С. 22–31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/eps202360453.
Antonovski, A.Yu. “‘Daite deneg i ne meshaite’, ili O tom, kak nauka otnositsya k publike” [‘Give Money and Don’t Interfere,’ or About How Science Relates to the Public], Bulletin of Tomsk State University. Philosophy. Sociology. Political science, 2023, no. 74, pp. 249–256. DOI 10.17223/1998863X/74/22. (In Russian)
Bird, A. “What Is Scientific Progress?”, Noûs, 2007, vol. 41 (1), pp. 64–89. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0068.2007.00638.x.
BonJour, L. In Defense of Pure Reason: A Rationalist Account of A Priori Justification. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1998.
Chalmers, D. “Why Isn’t There More Progress in Philosophy?”, Philosophy, 2015, vol. 1 (90), pp. 3–31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S00 31819114000436.
Cooper, C. Citizen Science. How Ordinary People Are Changing the Face of Discovery. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 2016.
Dupré, J. “Against Scientific Imperialism”, PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, 1994, vol. 2, pp. 374–381.
Niiniluoto, I. Is Sciense Progressive? Dordrecht: Springer, 1980.
Shipovalova, L.V. “Raspredelennoe nauchnoe poznanie – na puti k raznoobraziyu” [Distributed Scientific Knowledge – On the Way to Diversity], Epistemology & Philosophy of Science, 2023, vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 22–31. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.5840/eps202360453. (In Russian)
Sokolova, T.D., Tukhvatulina, L.A. “Metodologicheskii reduktsionizm i ideya progressa v sotsial’no-gumanitarnykh naukakh: internalistskaya perspektiva” [Methodological Reductionism and the Idea of Progress in the Social Sciences and Humanities: An Internalist Perspective], Voprosi filosofii, 2022, no. 11, pp. 76–86. DOI: 10.21146/0042-8744-2022-11-76-86. (In Russian)
Stoljar, D. “Is there Progress in Philosophy? A Brief Case for Optimism”, in: R. Blackford & D. Broderick (eds.) Philosophy’s Future: The Problem of Philosophical Progress. Hoboken: Wiley, 2018, pp. 107–118.
Tukhvatulina, L.A. “Nauka kak ob”ekt very i nedoveriya: fenomen denializma” [Science as an Object of Faith and Ditrust: A Phenomenon of Denialism], Epistemology & Philosophy of Science, 2023, vol. 60, no. 1, pp. 6–20. DOI: 10.5840/ eps20236011. (In Russian)
Wedgwood, R. The Nature of Normativity. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2007.
Whewell, W. “Researches on the Tides Sixth Series: On the Results of an Extensive System of Tide Observations Made on the Coasts of Europe and America in June 1835”, Philosophical Trasactions, 1836, no. 126, pp. 238–336.
Williamson, T. “Model-Building in Philosophy”, in: R. Blackford & D. Broderick (eds.) Philosophy’s Future: The Problem of Philosophical Progress. Hoboken: Wiley, 2018, pp. 159–172.
